Skip to main content

About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23
have their only naval base outside the former soviet union in syria. ladies and gentlemen, the russians are a very big part of this problem. i would not assume that the united states is the main issue here. if the russians and the chinese play ball on this, this could've been resolved a long time ago. but my sense is pessimistic. my sense, it's probably too late to put humpty dumpty of syria back together again. it has festered too long. all of this time that something could have been done, pretty much nothing was done except to make the situation worse. all of the talk in the united nations, and elsewhere, and the talk of a cease-fire, these are not solutions. this is talk. it's too late. it's too unclear. it's too fractious. how many in this room could name the opposition? how many in this room have a clear view of who the opposition is? or will be? on a danger to the united states, to the gcc and others? do we know this? are we going to hand weapons to them? i remember a reporter from "the wall street journal" asking me as the revolution was going on in libya, whose the opposition, d
approach. and then there's the issue of syria. please say some words about what you see as the next steps with regard to iran, how do we see that unfolding in the time ahead, and then what's the way forward with syria? >> yeah. three things. one, you know, the arab spring turned out to be less spring. probably the better term is the arab awakening, and we're going to go through springs and winters and summers and falls, and it's going to vary country to country, and it's going to take a long time. but look, it was inevitable, unavoidable and actually a good thing that the people of the arab world should start taking some responsibility for their future. and there's just no going back. and it is very much in our interest how these awakenings come out and that they result in societies that are democratic, that are producing a better life for their people, and we should do everything we can in a smart way recognizing we're not so popular in the middle east right now to try to help get that outcome. there are a couple big threats to that. one is syria, and i'm more worried about syria in term
or syria you will see that in each of these cases there are significant cases funding and model was hard to do. people like to fight the eastern european case because it was successful. the problem there is there wasn't a nato membership in the e.u. but helped to really drive that political role and meet the commitment of the government to undertake the reform. certainly for a country like tunisia. what they're looking at interestingly enough are the cases of south korea, taiwan and south africa as examples of places that have undergone a similar authoritarian transitions to the space rule, particular emphasis on the police and internal capability. >> i'm very glad you mentioned those last few cases that may in fact pulled out some opportunities from learning because if we hadn't integrated that possibility into the way this group responded to the question i would have underscored just how potentially significance the absence of prior model is for the securities sector reform in the arab world because it causes a great deal about the limited validity of what we often think about as best
and syria. the imposition of the current set of sanctions wouldn't have been possible without such a deal last november but if the sanctions led to iran losing up to or a little more than half of its oil exports, with saudi arabia be willing to step in and make those exports and i think with a caveat that we probably can't make up all of iran's exports whether it be a mechanism to totally shut them down because that would take the saudi production right up and leave no spare capacity which tends to be a driver for the higher oil prices. so, as the sanctions have come about, we had some bumps in the oil market particularly in the spring in anticipation, but as they've been implemented i think we have at least a stabilization from where the prices are the lower rates won't and we are going to see what of the sanctions have an influence on the decision making will. to meet the bottom line is is iran really seriously willing to talk about giving of its nuclear weapons program i don't see there is a big problem in resolving the whole issue. if they want to prevaricate and have a situation wher
of the drivers, although not an age when but one that is critical has been weapons coming into syria, including from russia. even this week the turks forced a plane to land. it was crossing in their airspace. allegedly carrying weapons for assad's government. how has the president we set with russia increased american influence in moscow? so that one would think the president could convince the russians to act differently. and then i would ask you, dov, to respond or to explain how governor romney in his approach to america's leadership in the world plate carefully so that america might have more influence in stopping the killing in syria? >> so, the reset with russia was simply taking a very clear guide approach and recognizing that you're going to have inches that you can cooperate on an interests were you see things very different way. in areas like arms control, reducing the nuclear danger, nuclear proliferation and, of course, want to cooperate with russia. in areas where the agreed to allow supplies to come through russian territory to support our troops in afghanistan, of course want to
are infinitely more engaged right now but the coverage of what's happening in syria isn't bad but i don't know that it showed a great deal of light, and part of the problem is even though he were asking about -- i know you began by asking about what is happening, and what i think of the coverage of that today. any time israel is involved in the story it becomes an increase do it excruciatingly difficult story for american journalists to cover because there is for the most part a natural sympathy in this country. a sense of identity in this country and many reporters both friends and colleagues of mine, the late peter jennings used to road defeat to write and be criticized for taking an anti-israeli point of view not so much that he had spent many years living in the arab world and had a sympathetic point of view to arabs. i fink what is happening in gaza means almost any definition of tragedy. they cannot be expected on the one hand to stand by while their cities are rocketed. on the other hand, the great irony of the paradox of that story is because the israeli defense forces are infinitely m
. moss. there's a civil war in syria. should the united states be doing more to help the opposition to the syria government? >> no, i'm the peace and prosperity candidate, and peace is peace on earth, not just in the lower 50 or 48, and i am opposed to war because it creates more problems than it solves, and things can be settled peacefully. there's one example going back to the nuclear menace that the f-35 represents. if i'm elected, i would create a new federal department by merging two existing ones, namely, it would be called the department of social and national security. social being the partners, and then that's fully funded. the rest goes to the national security. i'm not afraid of attacks us. >> moderator: mr. sanders, syria? sanders: i not only voted against the war in iraq, but the ethics voted against the gulf war, and after two wars, 6,000 soldiers, costs us over $3 trillion added to our national debt. no, i do not think that we should be involved in the caring of syria. assad killed tens of thousands of his own people. it's appropriate that we arm the rebels, but do it
on a foreign policy issue and start with mr. moss. there's a civil war in syria should the united states be doing more to help the opposition to the syrian government. moss: no. the peace and prosperity candidate. and peace is peace on earth not just in the lower fifty or 48. and i am opposed to war because it creates more problems than it solves. and thin things can be said more peacefully as one example going back to the nuclear menace that the f-35 represents. if i am elected, i will create a new federal department by merging two existing ones namely it would be called the department of social and national security. the social being the [inaudible] and then that's fully funded. the rest goes to the national security. i'm not afraid of them attacking ugh us. [laughter] >> moderator: mr. sanders. syria. sanders: i think most vice president people know despite what you may have heard. i only not voted against the war in iraqi voted against the gulf war and after two wars, which have cost over 6,000 soldiers will end up costing over $3 trillion added to our national debt. no, i do not thi
, syria and china and republican senator john mccain and democratic senator mark udall led the delegation. this panel takes a broad look at the global perception of american power and leadership in the world as well as advances in military and defense technology. from last week, this runs just over an hour. >> ladies and gentlemen, welcome. my name is gideon and i'm the editor of foreign affairs and it is a wonderful privilege and honor and pleasure to be here again at the halifax from. foreign affairs is in the business of serious discussions by knowledgeable people with important issues, free and frank exchanges on the most important questions out there and that's actually the same business that halifax is and so we are delighted to be the media sponsor, and it is going to be fantastic weekend. let me just cut right to the chase. we have a fantastic panel, and more importantly, a great topic and a wonderful group with all of you as well and so let's get right to it. our panelists here, david singer of "the new york times," the former undersecretary deputy secretary of state for global a
displayed in the face of what were initially peaceful protests. obviously the situation in syria has deteriorated since then. we have been extensively engage with the international community as well as regional powers to help the opposition. we have committed to hundreds of millions of dollars of humanitarian aid to help folks both inside of syria and outside of syria. we are constantly consulting with the opposition on how they can get organized so that they are not splintered and divided in the face of the onslaught from the assad regime. we are in very close contact with countries like turkey and jordan that immediately border syria and have an impact, and, obviously, israel, which is having already raised concerns as we do about, for example, movement of chemical weapons that might occur in such a chaotic atmosphere. and i could have an impact not just within syria, but on the region as a whole. i'm encouraged to see that the syrian opposition created an umbrella group that may have more cohesion than they've had in the past. we are going to be talking to them. my envoys are goin
everyone, folks in syria and homs, they show what they could, to folks here in oakland with camera phones trying to show police misbehaving. somebody, the act of journalism, how to protect people, whether they are citizens or professionals -- what you think? we do not have a conversation about that. should there be an international standard of journalistic rights, if you are committing journalism you should be protected? how you protect those folks? >> good luck implementing that law. is a great question. something journalists and tijuana struggle with all the time with the rise of social media and websites a lot of you have heard about -- including one which started out as a compendium of information about basically narco turf wars, shootings in the streets, the headings. it started off as a visual wallpaper and has since become interesting, more sophisticated, and is beginning to write articles and put -- and the editor is anonymous, but they are beginning to publish pieces. this thing that was touted early on as being a kind of innovative or new information delivery system is now turni
for the first time units us, unlike in syria so we don't have the divisions we're facing in syria so we have unifieded the international community as that supports the political settlements so i think this opportunity should be used. so far, there are settlements to face, but i think we should have hope, faith, and i think the political settlement, this provides a grant for hope in the future. thank you. >> thank you. >> i'd like to echo dan in thanking you all for coming out on the dreary day, especially for a holiday for many of you, and thanks to ibrahim as well for staying up late and giving us those great insights. as all of us know, the united states has just been through a presidential election. president obama was re-elected, and the obama administration had a number of, i think, foreign policy and counterterrorism successes in the first administration. obviously, bin laden was killed in the special operations raid. president obama oversaw the drawdown of troops in iran as well as afghanistan and, yet, i think the lasting legacy from the first term of the obama administration may wel
has taken against syria have that actually contribute any money to the humanitarian crisis that now exist in syria? >> i think occupation from russia and china have been very small. i will have to write to the honorable lady with details about the. they are not so large that have been committed in my mind, let us put it that way. we will encourage, i have encouraged before russia to make a contribution to those u.n. funds, but the biggest contribution, the biggest occupation comes from the states emphatically from the european union, third from the united kingdom. and, of course, we are also contributing the european union money. so the backing for these things is very heavily western as things stand. >> i know the foreign secretary said he didn't want to debate about the portion it or proportion. but while he is right to condemn militant rocket attacks would not also condemn the loss of innocent lives, particularly children? and with respect to both the u.n., is he out to be convinced that by taking the stance of the u.n. come uk government is to be taken, he doesn't risk undermini
, the conflict would probably be spreading to syria, creating one large issue. withdrawing from the western part of afghanistan. it would be disruptive of the security of oil flowing through the strait of hormuz. and there is a further uncertainty involved in that kind of an operation common namely how successful would be, in fact. and estimates regarding israel's potential to be decisively effective and estimates depend on the scale of the american attack. even a relatively modest attack by the united states would inflict serious casualties when the ratings for this for precipitation of the spirit are still unknown factors of what happens. there will be a significant factor of human casualties, particularly in places that are larger than some facilities, that have been destroyed or relocated. all of that makes an attack not a very attractive remedy for dealing with the problem. a problem which then would pale with significance compared to the consequences of the attack once the dynamic concept was set in motion. so i dismiss that serious alternative. i think it would be an act of utter irrespon
's happening in syria, but the coverage of what's happening in syria, not bad, but i don't know that it shed a great deal of light. and part of the problem is even, you are asking about, i know you began by asking me about what's happening in gaza, and what i think of the coverage of that. did i hear you correctly? >> yes, you did. >> it's, you know, anytime israel is involved in a story it becomes an excruciatingly difficult story for american journalists to cover. because there is, for the most part, a natural sympathy in this country, a sense of identity in this country with israelis. and many reporters, old friends and colleagues, the late peter jennings, used to i think very unfairly be criticized for taking an anti-israeli point of view, was so much an anti-every point of view as that it spent many years living in the arab world and had a sympathetic point of view that arabs. i think what is happening in gaza right now meets almost any definition of tragedy. the israelis cannot be expected, on the one hand, the standby while their cities are rocketed. on the other hand, the great irony
for a moment in conclusion about the fact that there are various conflicts going on around the world, in syria we have seen 40,000 killed, i don't know how many, 100,000, 200,000, who have been wounded, many of them innocent women and children because of the ferocity and barbaric conduct of this conflict. i don't know how many people today in china are subject to infanticide because there is not a birth certificate available and we know that that practice not only in china but in other parts of the world, a lot of it in asia, go on. we live in a very troubled and tush leapt world. not only -- turbulent world. not only the normal situation, there are people who are born with disabilities from time to time. i have had the honor of knowing children as all of us have, and there are no more loving and caring people in our world than children and disabilities who have disabilities. but there is going to be a lot more because of the conflicts that are going on in various places in the world. they might deserve our special attention because they are living in countries that will have a lot less of the
syria you will see that in each of these cases there are significant differences and so finding a model that works is like people like to cite the eastern european case because it was unsuccessful. the problem there is consensus in the membership but help to drive that political will and raise the commitment of the government to undertake reforms. there isn't something parallel to that for the country like to tunisia. but they are looking as the cases of south korea and south africa and chile as examples of places that have undergone similar offer rotarian positions to a space rule which has given an emphasis on the internal to devotee. >> you know, i'm jury glad you mentioned those last few cases that may in fact hold some opportunities for learning because we have not integrated that possibility into the way in which we responded to the question. i would have underscored just how potentially significance the absence of prior model is for the securities sector reform in the arab world because it tells a great deal about the limited validity of what we think of as best practice in this
. syria has descend understood civil war and the arab spring has turned stormy. the united states sends hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid to countries around the world, to democracies and dictators. what should be the basic guiding principles of american foreign policy? berg: fundamentally i have to say that freedom is something we need to encourage across the world but let me talk about christopher stevens and what happened there. his death along with three others is a tragedy. i know that has been in a lot of people's thoughts and prayers. we need to get to the bottom of that. and i'm not here to speculate who did what but we need to find out. the american people need to know. as the thing unfolds i hope it can be transparent and clear. two things will come out of that. number one, if there are people that made mistakes and need to be held accountable we can hold them accountable. also we can learn from that. so in the future if we have diplomats abroad we can insure we're protecting them. as it relates to other countries, there is a lot of turmoil in the middle east, you
national security, whether it be in the middle east which we read about everyday, whether it be syria, iran, pakistan, considering -- into network and afghanistan, the fault lines in the middle east. weatherby out in the pacific with the rise of china. look at what's going on with the items within the pacific, korea, 29 euros leader in charge of korea, what is he going to do in the future. we have narcoterrorism, we have transnational narcoterrorism. what does that mean for the future and so could ever country? i don't know. but these are questions we have to take a look at. these are questions that we have to be prepared to operating. the other thing i have learned come a frankly the hard way, over the last several years as my time in a back is that you also have what i call opportunists who will try to take advantage of instability and de- stabilizing influence, and mason governments are facing government. and these opportunists are may be unpredictable. and i was use iraq as an example. there were lots of opportunists and iraq. iran, turkey, saudi arabia, kuwait, nonstate actors all oppo
that we should be in afghanistan longer, that we should do more in syria, that we should do something militarily and iran was continually pushed away from that by the more political politically minded wing of his party that was reading an internal polling which said, there's not much difference particularly on afghanistan it when republicans and democrats. so you don't have the demand side, if you will for the kind of military spending that we've seen over the last decade. you know longer have a public outcry for military spending on this scale as a response to terrorism either. the second point related to that which is a bit of a two-edged sword is that the public believes and the league also that there are cheaper technological solutions to our national security problem. and, of course, the most obvious exponent of this is a drones and other remote-controlled warfare that instead of invading a country, you can just, the public perceives in many elites also proceed, station drones along its border. there's no faxing strategic conversation about whether that is, in fact, correct and w
.s.-prc relationship in the sense that things will go off the tracks with regard to either iran or syria, or now with israel's problems on the gaza and so on, i think that both sides will be careful to try to work as well together as they can, but they don't look at things exactly the same way. and it will matter i think, at least to the united states if we find things we think should get done at the united nations or in other ways are being stymied by china. i'm not predicting that what i would at least put a star next to that as a possibility. north korea, i think we're going to see some renewed efforts over the next several months to see if there's a path forward with north korea. i don't see the obama administration changing the terms of engagement. and our ambassador in seoul just reiterate the fact that we won't. but we'll also the new government in seoul, which i think no matter who wins, will be looking towards at least some more engagement. and that could indeed complicate things and involve both the u.s. and china, and i think we have to pay attention. finally, on these issues, i think
spring, syria versus the liberalizing countries. what are the biggest challenges to u.s. foreign policy from all this innovation and new technology? >> well, you've mentioned, i think, a number of the biggest challenges. one of the ways that i think we benefit from thinking about this is to distinguish between long-term goals and near-term management challenges. >> uh-huh. >> so let's start with the easier one, right? long-term goals, we have to bet on openness, freedom, universal access to private markets for the reasons i talked about in my remarks and many others, the recipe for global peace and prosperity is in that long-term vision. there's no question there are short-term challenges that are very real. greater connectivity, broadband deployment over time will lead to greater economic opportunity and job creation. in the near term, there's potentially a mismatch between connectivity giving dangerous people larger platform and forum without losing economic opportunity as quickly. when we think about that, we have many difficult management challenges, but one of the things that we ha
the context of afghanistan and the grasso, syria versus the liberalized country order the biggest challenges to the u.s. foreign policy from all of this innovation in the technology? >> you mentioned i think a number of the biggest challenges one of the ways we benefit from thinking about this is to distinguish between long-term goals were mere term nm management challenges. long-term goals we have to bet on openness, freedom of access to private markets. for the reasons i talked about in my remarks and many others, the recipe for global peace and prosperity is in that. a good question though on the short term challenges that are very real and over time it will lead to greater economic opportunity and job creation. in the new term there is potentially a mismatch between connectivity doing dangerous people larger reform without moving the opportunity as quickly. we have many difficult management challenges but one of the things we have to do is speed up the economic opportunity side so if you are as convinced as i am that the more there is economic opportunity, the less threats will see. it c
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)